Originally posted by Bill Lear
Doc,
What is your definition of a training style, a system, and an art? And, where does American Kenpo fit in?
Sincerely,
Billy :asian:
Well Sir,
Style
“Individuality presented in a particular method of execution or expression.”
System
“An organized and coordinated method and/or procedure. The level and sophistication of that system varies.”
Art.
“The execution of a particular concept, as found in works of aesthetic value in a field or category of a
nonscientific branch of learning.” - Webster
In my opinion, there is no “training style” only “personal style” expressed within the context of an artistic endeavor. The martial “arts” are aptly named for its personal interpretation of an “artistic ideal” as symbolized by its teacher and passed to the student who in turn expresses it with their own personal style within the limitations of the art as taught.
The root of the so-called “style” comes from the Chinese who had only one martial science, but many different components that made up the whole. Different teachers chose to focus on particular aspects of the science creating personal training methods and focus. This has often been misinterpreted and translated as a particular style meaning “their style of training.” But this is a misuse of the term in translation. The teacher gives his personal method and what you do with it is your style or expression of the science.
Than, other cultures took license of the information, and began to interpret it artistically and not necessarily functionally, creating actual martial styles based in part on cultural/religious preferences and philosophies. But built within these “arts” is THE style. In other words you may not change the expression but must adhere to the “style” of the master and embrace it as “your style” as well.
This is most common in the Okinawan/Japanese Traditional Disciplines, placing the emphasis on the “style” or “how” you perform over and above all else. The master of the discipline thus dictated the “style.” Anyone who deviated from the master had to break away because if you did not perform it exactly as the master dictated, you were not doing “his style,” therefore you had to break away and create your own “style.” It is these type arts that "lineage" became important, and is less so in more conceptual arts where "function over form" is the order of the day.
This is where most of the expressions and differences in style names came from. Anyone can create a “style” or “art” as it is today, but not everyone can create a “functioning system” and almost no one understands the science. The original science is not to be interpreted, only learned. Style, Art, System, are all subjective terms but science must be learned first before it may be deciphered or interpreted, and that excludes personal preferences. However, once it is learned, how you utilize it makes it a style. The major differences lie in whether your style is artistic, or scientific based in my opinion.
Your style is your expression. It may have as little or as much invested, as you desire. You may view an art and decide to express it yourself tomorrow. Whether it is good or bad will be determined by you, for it is your expression only. True science cannot be approached in the same manner. Its foundation must be learned from a competent source to establish a base for personal interpretation but only within the confines of the science itself.
Where American Kenpo fits depends upon the interpretation. The most common is the commercial version based on concepts of “motion.” This is most like JKD which is a training concept, but AK is much more systematic, but still limited to the boundaries of its conceptual base of syllabus teaching. This is intentional to promote individual functional style over instructor preference because its overall goal is function by and for the individual first over “artistic” endeavors or the propagation of the style itself. This is why students of AK, in general, make its worse teachers. However there are some who have gone beyond the superficial and have taken their interpretation to significance, but because of their own personal intelligence and experience, not from the general conceptual syllabus. As I have often said, the quality of American Kenpo lies in the hands of its good teachers, not in any written works of Ed Parker’s guides to concepts.
